[Q] lagfix(s)... what are their difference? - Galaxy S I9000 General

there's just too many of them, and I've not seen any thread or page that actually compare them or mention what kind of method are the developers applying. is it possible for any one start a thread to share their experience and what kind of improvement is being applied on the device...
another question, with so many lagfix out there, which one is not suitable for SGS?
I hope i'm not bringing any sensitive issue here, but i believe this is what newbies like me would love to know/learn... =)

I appreciate the simplicity of this question. There are many on this forum that are clearly very educated in this content but many of us don't quite get a 100% of what's going on.
I second the question, what are the differences? I know it makes the SGS way faster but why do we need it? Is this something that needs to be applied to all or this fixing something specific in 2.1?

As much as I know, lagfixes are for SGS only! Other Android devices don't have lag problems. If I understood right it is because SGS is the only one which uses old and slow FAT32 file system while others are on Linux based EXT file systems that are newer and faster, thus giving better response at demanding moments. Lagfix creates such an EXT partition which then works like buffer between the FAT32 and the CPU/memory (someone correct me if I'm wrong)...

Actually, the program storage on the Galaxy S isn't FAT32, it's Samsung's proprietary RFS file system (which appears to be the problem). FAT32 isn't particularly slow, and is used pretty much universally for SD cards.

Mithent said:
Actually, the program storage on the Galaxy S isn't FAT32, it's Samsung's proprietary RFS file system (which appears to be the problem). FAT32 isn't particularly slow, and is used pretty much universally for SD cards.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
As far as I know, RFS is based off FAT16 with journaling support.

*knock knock....
anyone like to add more to this discussion?

Voodoo fix- i think uses ramdisk (safest imho)
Ext3/ ext 4 fix- need to make partition on external card (2nd safest as can only damage external card)
Oneclickfix- makes ext2 partition file in internal memory (i have no probs with it right now but can be most dangerous as its internal ram which can't be replaced)
There's this app on market called swapper2 which no one has talked about which seems to make a ext3 swap file. I think its for all phones rather then just for sgs
Sent from my GT-I9000 using Tapatalk

Related

Is it beneficial to move Dalvik cache files to SD?

I'm just wondering as this does not seem to be a topic written about much.
For example, this thread details how to do it based on another rom, http://forum.xda-developers.com/showpost.php?p=7021325&postcount=2
But, this would be doable on a rom such as Cyanogenmod 6.1.1 I presume?
One obvious benefit would be to have more internal memory to be used for apps or whatnot, but does it benefit with making the system feel a bit faster or speedier, or anything of the sort?
Thanks for any info you provide.
Android 17 said:
I'm just wondering as this does not seem to be a topic written about much.
For example, this thread details how to do it based on another rom, http://forum.xda-developers.com/showpost.php?p=7021325&postcount=2
But, this would be doable on a rom such as Cyanogenmod 6.1.1 I presume?
One obvious benefit would be to have more internal memory to be used for apps or whatnot, but does it benefit with making the system feel a bit faster or speedier, or anything of the sort?
Thanks for any info you provide.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The problem with doing that is it usually causes a performance loss.
Unless you have a high class card.
I have a class 6 SD card, I read that using a 4 or higher is recommended, so perhaps it would be fine in my case? I certainly wouldn't try it with the included card, that's only a class 2.
Android 17 said:
I have a class 6 SD card, I read that using a 4 or higher is recommended, so perhaps it would be fine in my case? I certainly wouldn't try it with the included card, that's only a class 2.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Class 6 may be fast enough to do it.
You're welcome to try it and see what the result is.
I certainly wouldn't try it with any slower of a card though.
Anyone have any experience doing so, or encountered any positives or negatives of attempting to do so?
Android 17 said:
Anyone have any experience doing so, or encountered any positives or negatives of attempting to do so?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I've done it to free up space. I've got about 230 apps/installed widgets and moving the davlik was the only way to reclaim my space. Works fine. Has slowed my phone but is acceptable (Class 2 32g card). I do have to say though that at this moment I'm in the process of replacing my microsd with a 32g class 10 card to speed things up a bit.

{Q}Typhoon CM7 laggy, fix?

For some reason it just seems to be laggy, is there a cause or a fix for this? Should I re-install cwmwith bigger than a 150mb partition?
jwleonhart said:
For some reason it just seems to be laggy, is there a cause or a fix for this? Should I re-install cwmwith bigger than a 150mb partition?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
mine works great, none lag at all, you sure you have right CWM given by typhoon and you are doing ext4 partition for sd card, i have 1gb partition on sd and it works great as long as you install it correct you shouldn't have a problem, start with "task29"....
I did TASK29 and i'm sure I installed the right CWM software. How do I do an EXT4 format, I think I just did a FAT32 format to the sdcard....
Also, what I mean by laggy is that if you put a live wallpaper up the phones gets extremely laggy, no matter how simple the wallpaper..I'm comparing it to a samsung vibrant (galaxy s) and i'm assuming they should be the same cuz the specs are the same and the HD2 seems definantly more refined with android... Hell we don't even having working GPS for CM7 lol.
jwleonhart said:
I did TASK29 and i'm sure I installed the right CWM software. How do I do an EXT4 format, I think I just did a FAT32 format to the sdcard....
Also, what I mean by laggy is that if you put a live wallpaper up the phones gets extremely laggy, no matter how simple the wallpaper..I'm comparing it to a samsung vibrant (galaxy s) and i'm assuming they should be the same cuz the specs are the same and the HD2 seems definantly more refined with android... Hell we don't even having working GPS for CM7 lol.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Tytung new 1.7 gps libs got working agps support..you can get a fix in 5-20 secs...
To create a sd ext, backup your sd card, then boot in cwm. I think it was advanced-partitoon sd card..or sth else...youll find it .
choose 1gb sd ext and 0swap...after that restore your files on sd card.
Concerning your laggy...can you run sd tools from market to test your writing and reading speeds?
Sent from my HTC HD2 using XDA Premium App
jwleonhart said:
I did TASK29 and i'm sure I installed the right CWM software. How do I do an EXT4 format, I think I just did a FAT32 format to the sdcard....
Also, what I mean by laggy is that if you put a live wallpaper up the phones gets extremely laggy, no matter how simple the wallpaper..I'm comparing it to a samsung vibrant (galaxy s) and i'm assuming they should be the same cuz the specs are the same and the HD2 seems definantly more refined with android... Hell we don't even having working GPS for CM7 lol.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You could try:
Slow SD card, Up the Read-ahead cache of the SD card, using the sweet little app SD Speed Increase, which is free on the market
Live wallpaper are lagging, and also battery eating (at least that's what they told me, but personally I don't use live wallpapers, so no guarantee)
Did you underclock your CPU?
Reflash your ROM, sometimes, things get clogged up (Happens to me too)
Oh and GPS doesn't work on CM7? Use the new Tytung GPS libs and you will have a fix very fast!
Eelkede said:
You could try:
Slow SD card, Up the Read-ahead cache of the SD card, using the sweet little app SD Speed Increase, which is free on the market
Live wallpaper are lagging, and also battery eating (at least that's what they told me, but personally I don't use live wallpapers, so no guarantee)
Did you underclock your CPU?
Reflash your ROM, sometimes, things get clogged up (Happens to me too)
Oh and GPS doesn't work on CM7? Use the new Tytung GPS libs and you will have a fix very fast!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thank you for advice.
I will test SD Speed Increase but i have found also SD-Booster which i think have the same effect.
What is your opinion about dorimanx typhoon tweaks?
I'm running a NAND build guys..... not SD
jwleonhart said:
I'm running a NAND build guys..... not SD
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
..i know, im using also the typhoon rom, but a faulty sd card could also slow down your device.
ivangs1 said:
Thank you for advice.
I will test SD Speed Increase but i have found also SD-Booster which i think have the same effect.
What is your opinion about dorimanx typhoon tweaks?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sorry, I don't know about the dorimanx typhoon tweaks.
and @jwleonhart, I know, but a slow SD card will slow down your android rom in some cases, I've noticed a big difference in a class 10 and a class 2 card.

Is EXT4 really that great? I think that RFS is better

Hello,
I was just wondering why people think that EXT4 is faster than RFS? Both of them are similar in speed at first boot and installation of a ROM, but I tend to notice that EXT4 goes much slower over time, as opposed to RFS. To test this out, I borrowed my friends epic, and tried flashing the SFR 1.2 ROM on one Epic and the EC05 stock ROM on the other epic. They were both fast, and sometimes EXT4 was a tad bit faster at loading pages and apps, but over the course of a week, I found EXT4 to slow down and RFS was starting to run faster. I have installed the same amount of apps on both phones, and the Stock Epic even had the sprint bloat installed, I installed the same apps on both phones and about a week later, the RFS File system was much better off then the EXT4 File system. I'm saying this from personal experience. Does anybody else notice the same thing?
For some people who say that the variables are different:
Well, I can say that the stock rom is odexed, but all the other variables are the same, same amount of apps, I always deleted the texts and call logs, after I saw them or after I received a call. Even then, many people say that EXT4 is much much much faster than RFS, and odexed RFS vs deodexed SFR is not much of a variable difference because one is running stock RFS and one is running an "Stock" EXT4 (now if you know of an odexed EXT4 ROM, then I will gladly try it. But all the other variables were basically the same)
I have realized and done similar tests for quite awhile ever since rom building for the Samsung Moment. Which is why I've never touched an ext4 rom for the Epic. But I tend to simply run completely stock aside from deodexing for more internal space and adding crt and stock 1% battery mod
I've not had a single issue with my Epic this way and it has always ran fast, smooth, and completely stable down to the smallest details with excellent battery life
Sent from my SPH-D700 using Tapatalk
Im not sure about RFS, but I can say ext4 would be surprising if it performed well. Afaik ext4 is designed for consistency more than perf. Perhaps ext4 could be configured for writeback journalling, the fastest it can go with journalling. Of course disabling the journal woulf be fastest of all. What is rfs? Pardon my ignorance, but I suppose it's not journalling?
Deliver by Epic 4G xda app
Lol use titanium backup on ext4 and rfs and you'll see the speed difference
Sent from my SPH-D700 using XDA Premium App
inimitableac said:
Lol use titanium backup on ext4 and rfs and you'll see the speed difference
Sent from my SPH-D700 using XDA Premium App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes but the slightest mistake with an untrained user how we've all been at one time or another can leave you with corrupted data. EXT4 is a good thing but it also shares it's amounts of bad as well.
Sent using TouchPal Curve Input
AproSamurai said:
Yes but the slightest mistake with an untrained user how we've all been at one time or another can leave you with corrupted data. EXT4 is a good thing but it also shares it's amounts of bad as well.
Sent using TouchPal Curve Input
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yea your absolutely right no argument against that.
Sent from my SPH-D700 using XDA Premium App
parasense said:
Im not sure about RFS, but I can say ext4 would be surprising if it performed well. Afaik ext4 is designed for consistency more than perf. Perhaps ext4 could be configured for writeback journalling, the fastest it can go with journalling. Of course disabling the journal woulf be fastest of all. What is rfs? Pardon my ignorance, but I suppose it's not journalling?
Deliver by Epic 4G xda app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
rfs is reiser fs. it is journaled as are most modern file systems.
edit: interesting fact: the guy that designed rfs murdered his wife.
i've gone back to RFS after a bunch of the EXT4 roms degraded for me over time. with journaling on. its possible it was my own fault but i honestly have no issues with the RFS roms right now except that they aren't as numerous as the EXT ones
schnowdapowda said:
rfs is reiser fs. it is journaled as are most modern file systems.
edit: interesting fact: the guy that designed rfs murdered his wife.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
W.r.t Samsung phones, RFS is not Reiser FS. It is essentially a Samsung proprietary FST32 compatible FS with journaling.
Regards,
Dave
EDIT: More info here - http://www.samsung.com/global/busin...ducts/fusionmemory/Products_RFS_Brochure.html
I used ext2 for all filesystems on my moment and noticed improvements over rfs, I always wondered why samsung stuck with rfs I assumed it was for stability? This has me confuzzled
Sent from my Droid using XDA Premium App
schnowdapowda said:
rfs is reiser fs. it is journaled as are most modern file systems.
edit: interesting fact: the guy that designed rfs murdered his wife.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Lmfao that is an interesting fact indeed
schnowdapowda said:
rfs is reiser fs. it is journaled as are most modern file systems.
edit: interesting fact: the guy that designed rfs murdered his wife.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
source?
10char
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hans_Reiser
He did infact, but its not the RFS we use... we use ROBUST File system by samsung not ReiserFS by Hans Reiser
rfs is a system designed by samsung, now, EXT4 is a partition scheme for linux, we run using a linux kernel on samsung hardware on solid state memory, it really is anyone's preference. thats why dual-kernels are the ****.
Great Butt Scratcher!!!!
schnowdapowda said:
rfs is reiser fs. it is journaled as are most modern file systems.
edit: interesting fact: the guy that designed rfs murdered his wife.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sorry to go off topic what kind of animal in on your signature. That got to be the funniest thing I ever seen in my life!!!
Is this what I've been experiencing? I feel like every rom I've tried slows down for me after about a week. Not terribly... but it starts to hang in certain places when it never hung at all to begin with. I've normally stayed away from rfs so I know the bulk of the roms I've flashed were ext4. Even now I'm on ACS bamboozle. A week ago I thought this was teh best rom evar. But now I lag a bit here and there. Quite annoying actually. Also, I ALWAYS enable journaling.
Sent from my SPH-D700 using XDA Premium App
I've never paid much attention to the speed, but the file corruption problems I've had on EXT4 make me nervous.
gokuman56 said:
Hello,
I was just wondering why people think that EXT4 is faster than RFS? Both of them are similar in speed at first boot and installation of a ROM, but I tend to notice that EXT4 goes much slower over time, as opposed to RFS. To test this out, I borrowed my friends epic, and tried flashing the SFR 1.2 ROM on one Epic and the EC05 stock ROM on the other epic. They were both fast, and sometimes EXT4 was a tad bit faster at loading pages and apps, but over the course of a week, I found EXT4 to slow down and RFS was starting to run faster. I have installed the same amount of apps on both phones, and the Stock Epic even had the sprint bloat installed, I installed the same apps on both phones and about a week later, the RFS File system was much better off then the EXT4 File system. I'm saying this from personal experience. Does anybody else notice the same thing?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You were not just comparing filesystems. The Stock ROM is Odexed, but SFR is Deodexed,
Some people have said that Odexed ROMS are faster than Deodexed ROMS, but they are more difficult to customize. I believe that is why all our customized ROMS are Deodexed.
xopher.hunter said:
I used ext2 for all filesystems on my moment and noticed improvements over rfs, I always wondered why samsung stuck with rfs I assumed it was for stability?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I have been running EXT2 & EXT4 since they came out. The speed difference has been major, IMO, both on my Moment running EXT2, and my Epic running EXT4.
On my Moment, I never even ran the journaling, though I did turn it back on for my Epic.
IMO, I will never use RFS again, unless I have no other choice. RFS is supposed to be the best for prevention of data loss, but when you turn on journaling with EXT4, you should retain the data protection offered with RFS.
I did have data loss due to frequent power loss (Extended battery for my Epic didnt fit perfectly, and loss connection until I fixed it), but that ended when I turned on journaling.
I have never ran a setup past a couple months, so I can't comment on the long term slowdown, but with just the change from RFS to EXT4 provides a performance increase of the level where I can see the difference in daily use of the phone.
gokuman56 said:
Hello,
I was just wondering why people think that EXT4 is faster than RFS? Both of them are similar in speed at first boot and installation of a ROM, but I tend to notice that EXT4 goes much slower over time, as opposed to RFS. To test this out, I borrowed my friends epic, and tried flashing the SFR 1.2 ROM on one Epic and the EC05 stock ROM on the other epic. They were both fast, and sometimes EXT4 was a tad bit faster at loading pages and apps, but over the course of a week, I found EXT4 to slow down and RFS was starting to run faster. I have installed the same amount of apps on both phones, and the Stock Epic even had the sprint bloat installed, I installed the same apps on both phones and about a week later, the RFS File system was much better off then the EXT4 File system. I'm saying this from personal experience. Does anybody else notice the same thing?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So, you ran two completely different ROMs with completely different customizations (one, as noted above, was deodexed) and optimizations, and you're just assuming the file system is the reason you're seeing a difference between the two?
As well, did you install all the exact same apps on each, make all the same phone calls, send/receive the same number of text messages, and utilize them in identical manners?
Correlation does not equal causation. Just because one ROM is running one file system and the other another and they perform differently is no evidence on its own that the file system is the cause. Until you eliminate all other outside variables, we've learned absolutely nothing from your experiment. Your test is also subjective, and not blinded. So your personal biases easily slip through, and your assumption that RFS is faster will lead you to use confirmation bias to notice the elements that confirm your supposition and ignore the rest. You'll be more likely to jump to consider the things the RFS-based phone does faster as more important than the ones the EXT4 phone did faster, when the same feature might be in the other list if it was on the system you preferred. This isn't a dig on you, it's a human cognitive bias we all employ that proper scientific tests are designed to avoid. But your test doesn't.
Now I'm not saying EXT4 IS faster, I'm merely saying your test does nothing to tell us one way or the other. As far as I'm aware Google shifted officially to EXT4 as the standard for Gingerbread, and I assume this was done for good reason. That's not to say Samsung didn't have good reason for using RFS that trumped it. But EXT4 is at least a non-proprietary standard that's easier for us to work with, which is one reason some prefer it.

[Q] Swap on G1 - Have some sense?

Some time ago in my old G1 I try a way to setup a swap patrition.
But also in a Desire Z.
It seemed to me that the phone would be more efficient.
Just my impression?
My question is becouse speaking in other forums I was strongly discouraged the use of swaps on Android. Increased power consumption, performance degradation.
From the mathematical point of view would not make sense, the ram is more powerful and less power hungry you SD.
Is it in real situations?
It makes sense to swap usage on Android phones?
Thanks for your explanations.
for me it does feel like a smoother faster machine when i use swap, usually around 96 on most of my sd cards. i have never found proof one way or another that it speeds things up and its not just a placebo affect. but everyone seems to have their own story.
here is an interesting quip on swap and compcache-
http://wiki.cyanogenmod.com/wiki/Swap_and_Compcache
best thing to do is test for yourself
@ demkantor
THANK YOU!
This link is very helpfull. Now I understand the two techniques, swap and Compcache! Ok, I knew swap but had not connected.
So, the answer should be:
on small phone, such is the G1 or Magic or GW620 and so on, may help. Compcache use CPU to compress and decompress page files... swap use SD and less cicle of CPU. May depend from apps you use Frequently.
A navigator use less CPU and more space so Compcache seems better... other apps with CPU consumption like videogames, mai prefer swap.
Yes, the best way is to try by myself, but with this knowledge I can understand better how and why.
Thank you so much again.
Its wierd...for most ROMs swap makes the phone a lot faster
But I recently built a AOSP ROM just to try it out
It works beautifully without swap!
Must be cuz it's so bare...
It really depends on how much you multitask
And if you use stock browser
That takes a ton of RAM
I usually remove the stock browser
Thanks.
And I will try your ROM with swap and will you know my impression on your post.
budspanzer said:
Thanks.
And I will try your ROM with swap and will you know my impression on your post.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Oh I haven't posted my ROM anywhere
Frayo is just a mod of a ROM i did
It's not the rom I was talking about
In fact I just deleted it since i want to learn a bit more programming before starting it up again
if you want a great discussion on this i always enjoy this post
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=558637
Anyway... Im tryng swap on ext4 in G1 and seems great works. And, also on a Desire Z with a VirtuousUNITY and... seems a Cyano but is a Sense 3.0.
Many people say is no good. But...
I start to have good feeling with swap.
Sent from my HTC Vision using XDA App
Swap and ext4 are 2 different partitions

is NAND Android better than SD and why?

I'ver got EU HTC HD2 and want to install Paranoid-AOKP-JellyBean. As you can see there are 2 versions of this interesting ROM:
NAND: http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1817793
and
SD: http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1793180
It's written elsewhere SD Androids can be used as dual-boot together with WindowsMobile (or with WP). It sounds perfect but there should be a price for this. That's why please explain me what is the superiority of NAND version of this Paranoid (and of all NANDs in general)? Thank you!
NAND = faster than SD but limited space fo apps, use link2sd/ap2sd or the like
SD = almost on par with nand but sometimes can slow down, Big storage for apps
i use both NAND & SD to boot Andy
Thanks for clarifying this. I always wondered the difference as well.
And to make sure
NAND is limited built in memory but stable
Sd is greater space but isn't always as stable because of class? Or is there another reason for that?
Sent from my SGH-T999 using Tapatalk 2
I "guess" the class doesn't have much impact since that speed is mostly for READ/ Wite/ Copy, I used both class 4 & class 10 & sometime I find that the class 4 is even more stable.
SD could be slower/ unstable might be because it needs to access some data/ memory & fetching could cause some mishaps - i guess :silly:
I use SD Android for over a year and truth is, since few months I didn't found any fast and stable build like those on NAND. Well, maybe on Gingerbread there were few ones that worked well, but since ICS was announced there always been some problems.
rexx87 said:
I use SD Android for over a year and truth is, since few months I didn't found any fast and stable build like those on NAND. Well, maybe on Gingerbread there were few ones that worked well, but since ICS was announced there always been some problems.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
thats true but there is a few roms works fine.
rexx87 said:
I use SD Android for over a year and truth is, since few months I didn't found any fast and stable build like those on NAND. Well, maybe on Gingerbread there were few ones that worked well, but since ICS was announced there always been some problems.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
i have only experience of darkstone superram froyo on SD, never tried NAND, but i've been amazed with how fast and stable that is.
i only installed it recently to get wifi tethering with my blackberry playbook but if i'd known how good it was going to be and how easy to set up i would have installed it ages ago.
the fact that i can revert to winMo at any time by rebooting makes it a no-brainer.
SD Android might be unstable because most SD cards aren't used to have such a high load all the time and often they end up with data corruption, so chkdsk every week gets into your routine. That makes NAND ROMs superior to SD ones.
prosecutor55555 said:
thats true but there is a few roms works fine.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Maybe, but it doesn’t change the fact that NAND is still better choice than SD.
mengfei said:
SD could be slower/ unstable might be because it needs to access some data/ memory & fetching could cause some mishaps - i guess :silly:
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
However the main concern reported elsewhere was these SD Androids consumed much more energy so this resulted in quick battery drain. Would you confirm those reports?
Spaqin said:
SD Android might be unstable because most SD cards aren't used to have such a high load all the time and often they end up with data corruption, so chkdsk every week gets into your routine. That makes NAND ROMs superior to SD ones.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So then what about NAND ROMs with scripts like Apps2SD? If you move most your apps into SD card then won't they exert too much load on SD card too?
prosecutor55555 said:
thats true but there is a few roms works fine.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Is Paranoid-jellybean also among them?
Other question: it seems SD ROMs save NAND memory since elsewhere it's reported NAND memory wore too, especially under intensive writes, so maybe would the SD ROMs be the remedy? How do you think?
Please use the multi-quote feature rather than triple posting.
ioy said:
However the main concern reported elsewhere was these SD Androids consumed much more energy so this resulted in quick battery drain. Would you confirm those reports?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
SD Android drains battery faster than NAND Android, yes.
ioy said:
So then what about NAND ROMs with scripts like Apps2SD? If you move most your apps into SD card then won't they exert too much load on SD card too?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
TBH I've used both forms of Android and neither seems to have exerted strain on my SD card very much. At the very least, my SD still appears with the same amount of storage it originally came with.
ioy said:
Is Paranoid-jellybean also among them?
Other question: it seems SD ROMs save NAND memory since elsewhere it's reported NAND memory wore too, especially under intensive writes, so maybe would the SD ROMs be the remedy? How do you think?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Correct, repeated writing of the NAND (especially for those people who think Task29 helps when it doesn't) can cause bad blocks which cannot be written to and eventually may make the phone unusable. However, having done a fair amount of flashing my phone I don't think I have many bad blocks. If I do, then they haven't actually affected me yet (i.e. I can use the recommended /system partition without having to account for extra space from the bad blocks).
Nigeldg said:
Please use the multi-quote feature rather than triple posting.
SD Android drains battery faster than NAND Android, yes.
TBH I've used both forms of Android and neither seems to have exerted strain on my SD card very much. At the very least, my SD still appears with the same amount of storage it originally came with.
Correct, repeated writing of the NAND (especially for those people who think Task29 helps when it doesn't) can cause bad blocks which cannot be written to and eventually may make the phone unusable. However, having done a fair amount of flashing my phone I don't think I have many bad blocks. If I do, then they haven't actually affected me yet (i.e. I can use the recommended /system partition without having to account for extra space from the bad blocks).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hi.
So that means flashing to NAND is limited? And it's better to use SD ROM's. How do I find out if and when the NAND becomes bad blocks.
Thank you.
Sent from my NexusHD2 using xda premium
halninekay said:
Hi.
So that means flashing to NAND is limited? And it's better to use SD ROM's. How do I find out if and when the NAND becomes bad blocks.
Thank you.
Sent from my NexusHD2 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Why not Google/forum search that? And when you say limited, you mean that there's a limit to the number of times you can flash, right? Well if there is one it's incredibly high, and it certainly isn't better to use SD ROMs as they're much slower and consume more battery.
Nigeldg said:
Why not Google/forum search that? And when you say limited, you mean that there's a limit to the number of times you can flash, right? Well if there is one it's incredibly high, and it certainly isn't better to use SD ROMs as they're much slower and consume more battery.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Okay,
Thank you very much.
Sent from my NexusHD2 using xda premium
Thanx!!
Nand is much faster as it uses the ram rather than having to read the SD card and then put it into the ram so speed is visibly slower. I use a nand ROM but with a2sd support. That wat you get the speed of a nand ROM but the app space of an SD ROM.. best of both
Sent from my HTC HD2 using xda app-developers app

Categories

Resources